Prospect Info: Joshua Roy Part 2

[OldCraig71]

The next great Roy to wear a Habs jersey, it seems fitting that it would be a Roy that leads us again.

 

[NotProkofievian]

Sure, but the context matters. It doesn't mean nothing BECAUSE it is around the norm for these guys.

I don't say the same about Suzuki for example after 4 games.

Giving the same sample size different weights based your preconceptions about a player seems bad.

 

[Mrb1p]

The next great Roy to wear a Habs jersey, it seems fitting that it would be a Roy that leads us again.

Hope he wears 66

 

[BaseballCoach]

Giving the same sample size different weights based your preconceptions about a player seems bad.

That's not what I am doing. And if it is a "preconception" that Suzuki can score goals in the NHL, then I'm guilty. However, the term is meaningless if used that way.

Similarly, my "preconception" that Mailloux is weak defensively was already reinforced by, you know, actually WATCHING the preseason games he played (4 including Red-White).

I'm well aware of what small sample sizes can do to stats, but my experienced EYES are telling me why Struble is having better results preventing goals than Mailloux.

 

[DAChampion]

Ryan Getzlaf was an AHL rookie in his D+3. He got 8 goals and 33 points in 17 games.

 

[NotProkofievian]

That's not what I am doing. And if it is a "preconception" that Suzuki can score goals in the NHL, then I'm guilty. However, the term is meaningless if used that way.

Similarly, my "preconception" that Mailloux is weak defensively was already reinforced by, you know, actually WATCHING the preseason games he played (4 including Red-White).

I'm well aware of what small sample sizes can do to stats, but my experienced EYES are telling me why Struble is having better results preventing goals than Mailloux.

I don't think so.

 

[FrankMTL]

"Let him cook" should be added to the thread title.

 

[Andrei79]

Ryan Getzlaf was an AHL rookie in his D+3. He got 8 goals and 33 points in 17 games.

Kucherov too, 24 points in 17 games. What Roy is doing is outstanding. I can think of two of our recent high picks that would have greatly benefited from this approach.

 

[Destopcorner]

Kucherov too, 24 points in 17 games. What Roy is doing is outstanding. I can think of two of our recent high picks that would have greatly benefited from this approach.

He will be our PP cornerstone on Kovalev spot for years. Suzuki bumper position ala Point.

Slaf is not doing anything good lately aux oreilles, he takes a decision before getting the puck and doesnt adapt/process the pace fast enough if the play ain't there anymore.

Every argument to play Roy at lower levels needs to be translated to Slaf. Yall realize they are 7 months appart right?

Roy thinks the game at a much higher pace while Slaf is still figuring out NHL size rinks. Sadly, staying up means he will never learn to dominate the way Roy does...

 

[DAChampion]

Kucherov too, 24 points in 17 games. What Roy is doing is outstanding. I can think of two of our recent high picks that would have greatly benefited from this approach.

That makes two comparables. I looked up some more, specifically CHL forwards that played in the AHL in their D+3.

Connor Garland, 14 points in 55 games.
Jason Robertson, 47 points in 60 games.
Dylan Strome, 31 points in 50 games.
Mike Ribeiro, 66 points in 74 games.
Andrew Mangiapane, 41 points in 66 games

Not a lot of examples, but either way point per game would be exceptional at age 20.

 

[BaseballCoach]

I don't think so.

So you think I don't know how small sample sizes affect stats.

So to start with, It's clear you believe four games is a very small sample size and that it is meaningless due to variation. So do you think the odds of Nick Suzuki still having the same number of goals as Jordan Harris after twenty games the same as David Savrd still having the same number as Harris?

If you think there are good reasons why Suzuki is likely to have more goals after 20 games than both Savard and Harris, why can't I think that there are good reasons why Mailloux has a much worse plus-minus than Struble right now? Statistically, do you really believe it is likely that random "variation" is all that is causing the differential of 13 over just 4 games?

 

[DAChampion]

So you think I don't know how small sample sizes affect stats.

So to start with, It's clear you believe four games is a very small sample size and that it is meaningless due to variation. So do you think the odds of Nick Suzuki still having the same number of goals as Jordan Harris after twenty games the same as David Savrd still having the same number as Harris?

If you think there are good reasons why Suzuki is likely to have more goals after 20 games than both Savard and Harris, why can't I think that there are good reasons why Mailloux has a much worse plus-minus than Struble right now? Statistically, do you really believe is it likely that random "variation" is all that is causing the differential of 13 over just 4 games?

Posts like these are how you come as one of the top sophists on the site. Your arguments and analogies are absolutely ridiculous, and I'm sure you understand that. I'll spell them out for kicks:

1) "Goals" are a different statistic from "+/-", in that they're generally perceived to be, for a very good reason, more reliable. Goals are about the player and the quantity of ice time, and +/- is more about linemates, random fluctuations, etc, unless you think that Struble will finish the season with +234 relative to Mailloux. The uncertainties and the biases for +/- are simply higher than they are for goals.

2) If we're making predictions of Suzuki, Harris, and Savard, we're not basing them off of four-game sample sizes. We're basing them on few-hundred-game sample sizes, we're thinking of everything they've done in the past few years and hardly considering the first four games of the season. Really, I doubt that even a single poster on here would make predictions for Suzuki based entirely off his first four games.

3) Struble is two years older than Mailloux, so he may be better than Mailloux for some time and that in turn may be irrelevant and not worth pointing out, should Mailloux end up the better player.

I suspect that you understand all of this and that you're not nearly as dim as you pretend to be. I think that you get caught up in your own narrative and in playing "gotcha!" which leads you to repeatedly making some unbelievably spurious arguments.

 

[BaseballCoach]

Kucherov too, 24 points in 17 games. What Roy is doing is outstanding. I can think of two of our recent high picks that would have greatly benefited from this approach.

To be fair, though, none of us know if Roy will be a better NHL scorer due to having played this weak level of competition than if he started in the NHL already. I'm ok with Roy starting in the AHL because he has things to learn, not because of some magic confidence he will gain from beating up sub-par defences. Frankly it's the fans who gain in confidence when a player is seen near the top of the rankings of something, anything. Look at how peope went gaga over Lane Hutson last year, indignant he was not one of the three Hobey Baker finalists, when he is not even half the player Luke Hughes is right now.

Seriously, is Joel Armia a much better hockey player right now than he was a month ago?

 

[BaseballCoach]

Posts like these are how you come as one of the top sophists on the site. Your arguments and analogies are absolutely ridiculous, and I'm sure you understand that. I'll spell them out for kicks:

1) "Goals" are a different statistic from "+/-", in that they're generally perceived to be, for a very good reason, more reliable. Goals are about the player and the quantity of ice time, and +/- is more about linemates, random fluctuations, etc, unless you think that Struble will finish the season with +234 relative to Mailloux. The uncertainties and the biases for +/- are simply higher than they are for goals.

2) If we're making predictions of Suzuki, Harris, and Savard, we're not basing them off of four-game sample sizes. We're basing them on few-hundred-game sample sizes, we're thinking of everything they've done in the past few years and hardly considering the first four games of the season. Really, I doubt that even a single poster on here would make predictions for Suzuki based entirely off his first four games.

Right, neither would I. In fact, I said so, so I don't know why you are even making this point but I'm sure you got pleasure writing what you thought was clever.

3) Struble is two years older than Mailloux, so he may be better than Mailloux for some time and that in turn may be irrelevant and not worth pointing out, should Mailloux end up the better player.

I suspect that you understand all of this and that you're not nearly as dim as you pretend to be. I think that you get caught up in your own narrative and in playing "gotcha!" which leads you to repeatedly making some unbelievably spurious arguments.

All this ado because you did not understand my point, leading YOU to think you had a "gotcha".

No, I don't think Struble will end up at +108 and Mailloux at -126. But I do believe Struble is actually the better two-way D right now (sure, being older could be part of it) and so I am not surprised by the early +/- records, or at least the directional feature (Struble a plus, Mailloux a minus).

When I asked "do you think these stats mean nothing" I was saying that I do not believe that random fluctuations are the ONLY thing causing Mailloux to have a worse +/- stat than Struble, that there are real reasons for a noticeable gap.

Unless you make a good hockey argument for why you think they are in reality equally good at the combined act of creating/preventing goals, I will conclude that you in fact agree with me.

 

[DAChampion]

All this ado because you did not understand my point, leading YOU to think you had a "gotcha".

No, I don't think Struble will end up at +108 and Mailloux at -126. But I do believe Struble is actually the better two-way D right now (sure, being older could be part of it) and so I am not surprised by the early +/- records, or at least the directional feature (Struble a plus, Mailloux a minus).

When I asked "do you think these stats mean nothing" I was saying that I do not believe that random flutuations are the ONLY thing causing Mailloux to have a worse +/- stat than Struble, that there are real reasons for a noticeable gap.

Unless you make a good hockey argument for why you think they are in reality equally good at the combined act of creating/preventing goals, I will conclude that you in fact agree with me.

Didn't read.

 

[morhilane]

Seriously, is Joel Armia a much better hockey player right now than he was a month ago?

It might have given him some confidence.

He might like the AHL because it's easier and he still have his full NHL salary thought.

 

[Skip Bayless]

The next great Roy to wear a Habs jersey, it seems fitting that it would be a Roy that leads us again.

Breaking - Joshua Roy suffers career threatening injury in NHL debut against Arizona.

 

[NotProkofievian]

So you think I don't know how small sample sizes affect stats.

So to start with, It's clear you believe four games is a very small sample size and that it is meaningless due to variation. So do you think the odds of Nick Suzuki still having the same number of goals as Jordan Harris after twenty games the same as David Savrd still having the same number as Harris?

If you think there are good reasons why Suzuki is likely to have more goals after 20 games than both Savard and Harris, why can't I think that there are good reasons why Mailloux has a much worse plus-minus than Struble right now? Statistically, do you really believe it is likely that random "variation" is all that is causing the differential of 13 over just 4 games?

I have 3 scenarios for you, and you tell me what you think they mean:

1.) In the next 4 games, Suzuki scores 8 goals and 4 assists.

2.) In the next 4 games, Suzuki scores 2 goals and 2 assists.

3.) In the next 4 games, Suzuki scores 0 goals and 0 assists.

 

[BaseballCoach]

It might have given him some confidence.

He might like the AHL because it's easier and he still have his full NHL salary thought.

If confidence is all Armia needs, then why has he never locked in great production after successful moments gave him more confidence?

 

[MXD]

Breaking - Joshua Roy suffers career threatening injury in NHL debut against Arizona.

*f*** you emoji*

 

[BaseballCoach]

I have 3 scenarios for you, and you tell me what you think they mean:

1.) In the next 4 games, Suzuki scores 8 goals and 4 assists.

2.) In the next 4 games, Suzuki scores 2 goals and 2 assists.

3.) In the next 4 games, Suzuki scores 0 goals and 0 assists.

I would need to know the shooting percentage and how he is playing. If I don't have that, I will conclude in case 1 that he is on a hot streak, but that it is now more possible he gets his 80 points than I thought before those 4 games.

In case two I'd think that he is back to normal, 7 points in 8 games, in the ballpark of previous seasons.

In case 3, I might start to worry that something is wrong this year (physical or mental issue to work through). But if he hit 6 goalposts and Caufield missed 4 empty nets on his passes, I would not worry.

 

[dcyhabs]

That's not what I am doing. And if it is a "preconception" that Suzuki can score goals in the NHL, then I'm guilty. However, the term is meaningless if used that way.

Similarly, my "preconception" that Mailloux is weak defensively was already reinforced by, you know, actually WATCHING the preseason games he played (4 including Red-White).

I'm well aware of what small sample sizes can do to stats, but my experienced EYES are telling me why Struble is having better results preventing goals than Mailloux.

Actually using stats correctly. Finding outliers and examining them.

Points are a fairly reliable indication of a skill. Other stats go downhill in usefulness from there, but not to zero.

 

[morhilane]

If confidence is all Armia needs, then why has he never locked in great production after successful moments gave him more confidence?

Armia always had consistency issues in the NHL and he usually got a busted knee or concussion out of his great games with the Habs, so he could never get going. Then he got Covid (at least) twice and never looked the same after.

 

[yianik]

1. So far so good.
2. Not sure why there is a fierce debate going on. He isn't years away from being tested. Regardless of what you think, a guy who is at about 2PPG in the AHL is going to get called up. If he does badly it means not a whole lot except he is not ready, and if he does well he will stay up and we will be happy.

 

[Adriatic]

The next great Roy to wear a Habs jersey, it seems fitting that it would be a Roy that leads us again.

More importantly what number will he wear with the big club? Too bad because he looks great with 10.